Are/were Namco ashamed of Soul Blade?

[MJN SEIFER]

I've touched on the fact that Soul Blade (Soul Edge in Japan) became Soul Calibur rather than Soul Blade II and so on, but also I have heard that Namco rarely consider Soul Blade to be a prequel despite the fact that it is one, and tend to not ignore Soul Blade hearsay, but see it as more of background stuff - they have the obvious fact that the Calibur games have most of the Soul Blade cast, and they all have the correct storylines, but they seem to want it to be viewed as Soul Blade is one game, Soul Calibur is another series, featuring most of Soul Blade's cast.

Also, in Soul Calibur, if you complete arcade mode with Maxi (SPOILER)he dies of injuries sustained in the final battle, as well as the fact he used all his energy to fight - and to indicate this, he is unable to finish his usual "Victory Scene", and instead starts to fall, clearly dying. The exact same thing happens with Li Long in Soul Blade. Did Namco want to include a storyline where a character (SPOILER)dies after defeating all enemies, but feel they didn't do the storyline justice with Li Long, so they tried it again? Notice both characters used Nunchaku (and, yes Li Long DID use Nunchaku, despite what the UK version said - "strange weapon he made himself" indeed! )

[Dreddz]

I don't reckon Namco would be ashamed of Soul Blade. For a game initially released in 1996 it was quite impressive and Namco should be proud of it. I guess the leap in quality between Soul Blade and Soul Calibur means Namco distinguishes the two as seperate franchises.

I haven't played Soul Blade in a looooong time (probably as far back as the late nighties) so I can't say whether Namco has even acknowledged the games existence in the Soul Calibur series. All I know is that without Soul Blade we wouldn't have Soul Calibur so whether Namco is ashamed of the game or not, its a pretty significant game in their portfolio.

[MJN SEIFER]

I don't reckon Namco would be ashamed of Soul Blade. For a game initially released in 1996 it was quite impressive and Namco should be proud of it. I guess the leap in quality between Soul Blade and Soul Calibur means Namco distinguishes the two as seperate franchises.

It was impressive, I was definitely impressed with it - more so than Tekken in fact (mostly because Soul Blade payed more attention to the storyline), but the last part in what you say makes sense - as good a Soul Blade is, you can clearly see the change in Soul Calibur.

I haven't played Soul Blade in a looooong time (probably as far back as the late nighties) so I can't say whether Namco has even acknowledged the games existence in the Soul Calibur series. All I know is that without Soul Blade we wouldn't have Soul Calibur so whether Namco is ashamed of the game or not, its a pretty significant game in their portfolio.

I still play it (the only Soul I don't have is Soul Calibur), and yes there is evidence of Soul Blade in the later games; Your probably not that familiar with the characters anymore, so you may not know what I'm on about, but when you look at the SC character's storylines there is evidence of their SB storylines, even if they're not complete (this is because SC mostly follow's Siegfried's SB storyline, but it follows the other character's storylines up until a point) I don't know if you remember what happens in Siegfried's Soul Blade ending, but that is pretty much where Soul Calibur begins.

[black orb]

>>> I used to play Soul Edge in the arcades, it was a bad ass game..

They should be ashamed of lame games like Tekken instead..

[Polnareff]

I agree with Dreddz-- Soul Blade was a really awesome looking and playing game for its time.

But at the same time, it DOES seem as if Namco can't bear to acknowledge the game. In arcades they called it Soul Edge, didn't they? Then the console one was called Soul Blade (anybody know the reason for this?). But then when Soul Calibur came out, it was as if SB never existed....

[MJN SEIFER]

In arcades they called it Soul Edge, didn't they? Then the console one was called Soul Blade (anybody know the reason for this?).

It's still Soul Edge in every version in Japan. Apparently non-Japanese gamers were believed too thick to know that an "Edge" can be the blade of a sword (I can't remember where I read that). The stupid part is that the game was called Soul Edge because that was the name of an important sword in the game's storyline (as was Soul Calibur) - despite the name change, the sword itself remained to be called "Soul Edge". So really caling the game Soul Blade makes less sense the more I think about it...

[sharkythesharkdogg]

>>> I used to play Soul Edge in the arcades, it was a bad ass game..

They should be ashamed of lame games like Tekken instead..

WHAT?!?!??!!?

We shall have to agree to disagree.

Either way, I agree with what's already been suggested about Namco simply wanting to emphasis the improvements made on Soul Blade in it's sequel. I wouldn't be ashamed if I were Namco. The game was incredible. It put Battle Arena Toshinden to shame.

[MJN SEIFER]

To be fair, I like Tekken too, but it annoyed me how you had to do tons of research to find the storyline of each character until Tekken 5, which had a Story Mode (so did Tekken 4, but it was poorly implemented). Soul Blade had more of a storyline, and you could see it while playing the game.

[Rase]

Apparently non-Japanese gamers were believed too thick to know that an "Edge" can be the blade of a sword (I can't remember where I read that).

If that's true than Namco is/was smurfing stupid. I'd be more inclined to believe it's some myth fabricated by a Western Japanophile though.

Soul Blade was a good starting point, but I feel it was so improved upon by Soul Calibur that it's largely irrelevant now. Happens all the time to good games, doesn't mean the developer is ashamed of them.

[MJN SEIFER]

I guess they may just be over looking it because the SC games improved on so much, as everyone's saying, but I still find it weird how one character in Soul Calibur has a really similar ending to another character in Soul Blade, and even builds up to it the same way (by being unable to finish his "victory pose"), and the characters use the same weapon (but don't fight the same). Did Namco feel the first ending wasn't done right or something?

[Polnareff]

In arcades they called it Soul Edge, didn't they? Then the console one was called Soul Blade (anybody know the reason for this?).

It's still Soul Edge in every version in Japan.

I was thinking of when they put the game out in the US, the arcade version was still called Soul Edge but Namco called it Soul Blade in English-speaking territories when it hit PSX. Supposedly there was some trademark issue or something that led to this.

What is REALLY strange about the shift from Edge to Calibur is that Namco actually dropped a couple gameplay mechanics in the transition. Namely, the sword-shaped bar that allowed you to do little supers, and a couple other things.

Calibur is like a whole different beast in terms of feel as well. It feels more hard-hitting.

[Shattered Dreamer]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Soul Blade one of the launch titles for the PSX? I think I remember watch a trailer for it on the Demo 1 CD that came with my PSX. Wow talk about gaming nostalgia

[MJN SEIFER]

I was thinking of when they put the game out in the US, the arcade version was still called Soul Edge but Namco called it Soul Blade in English-speaking territories when it hit PSX. Supposedly there was some trademark issue or something that led to this.

Now that you mention it, I'm pretty sure there was a Soul Edge arcade machine at some place I used to hangout as a kid, which was closer to the Japanese version, and one of the characters, Hwang, wasn't there.

I dunno if there was a legal issue on the name "Soul Edge" though...

[Polnareff]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Soul Blade one of the launch titles for the PSX? I think I remember watch a trailer for it on the Demo 1 CD that came with my PSX. Wow talk about gaming nostalgia

Soul Blade came out about a year or so after the PSX's launch. Like, closer to '97.

Although Battle Arena Toshinden was a launch title, I'm fairly certain.

'96 was a decent year for weapons-based fighters. Soul Edge, Toshinden 2, Star Gladiator, and I think Samurai Shodown IV all came out in '96.

[sharkythesharkdogg]

I do miss the fact that in the modern games you can't break weapons. I thought it added an interesting element to the game. Can't rely on the classic "guard and then counter-attack" style of gameplay as much.